Title
Heirs of Gregorio vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 117609
Decision Date
Dec 29, 1998
Spouses Tan acquired a disputed Quezon City lot through deeds of sale and assignment. Heirs of original owner Severa Gregorio alleged forgery, but courts upheld Tan’s ownership, citing good faith, best evidence rule, and indefeasibility of Torrens title.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 117609)

Factual Background and Title Issues

The property in dispute is a 1,381.1 square meter lot along Quezon Boulevard, Quezon City, originally titled in the name of Severa Gregorio. Severa leased the property to Shell company for twenty years beginning in 1965. After her death in 1976, her heirs discovered that their title had been cancelled and replaced by a new certificate of title (TCT No. 349788) registered in the names of spouses Wilson and Benita Tan. The spouses acquired the property through two transactions: (1) a purchase of 2/3 interest from Ricardo Santos, who allegedly obtained title from Severa via an alleged 1971 deed of sale, and (2) a purchase of 1/3 interest assigned by spouses Felicisimo and Rosalina Palomo, who obtained the share in a judicial sale.


Destruction of Evidence and Reconstitution of Records

A major complication arose when in 1988 a fire gutted the Quezon City Hall Building, destroying key original documents, including the original deeds and the new title in respondents’ names. The trial court ordered reconstitution of records in 1989. The heirs subsequently filed a supplemental complaint challenging the authenticity of the 1971 deed of sale allegedly executed by Severa Gregorio, specifically asserting that the signature was forged.


Trial Court’s Findings and Reliefs Granted

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) ruled in favor of the heirs, declaring the July 14, 1971 deed of sale and the subsequent deed by Ricardo Santos to spouses Tan null and void for being forged, while validating the assignment from the Palomos to the spouses Tan covering the remaining 1/3 portion. The RTC ordered cancellation of the titles in favor of respondents and reinstatement of the original certificate in Severa Gregorio's name. The court also imposed damages and attorney’s fees and ordered reimbursement related to payment of purchase price and taxes.


Court of Appeals Reversal

Both parties appealed. The Court of Appeals (CA) reversed the RTC, declaring ownership and title of spouses Tan over the entire property valid. The CA held that the spouses Tan were innocent purchasers for value in good faith, relying on the presumption of validity of Torrens title and the lack of convincing evidence of bad faith. The CA also discounted the NBI handwriting expert’s testimony due to the reliance on xerox copies rather than the original deed, which was destroyed in the fire.


Issues on Appeal to the Supreme Court

The heirs raised two principal errors before the Supreme Court:
A. The CA improperly disregarded the NBI handwriting expert’s testimony indicating the 1971 deed of sale was forged.
B. The CA erred in declaring spouses Tan as innocent purchasers in good faith.

The validity of the Palomos’ assignment of 1/3 undivided share was not contested in this appeal.


Analysis on Handwriting Expert Testimony and Best Evidence Rule

The Supreme Court affirmed the CA’s rejection of the handwriting expert’s testimony, emphasizing the best evidence rule under the Rules of Court. Only the original document may be used as evidence of its contents unless exceptions are met. The original deed was destroyed by fire, necessitating reliance upon certified xerox copies in court, which is insufficient for establishing forgery in light of the need for a reliable signature comparison. The Court cited precedents that forged signatures must be proven with clear, convincing evidence, which requires comparison of the questioned signature with genuine samples, which cannot be properly made from photocopies.

Additionally, while expert testimony in questioned documents is helpful, the Court reiterates the judge’s independent duty to evaluate the authenticity of signatures. Without the original deed, no definitive conclusion of forgery could be made.


The Presumption of Good Faith and Innocent Purchaser Doctrine

Under the Torrens system, ownership rights are protected by the presumption of good faith on the part of the transferee of registered land. Good faith exists when acquisition is without notice of competing claims or defects, and the purchase is for full value.

Here, spouses Tan conducted due diligence by verifying the title's status with the Registry of Deeds and had legal counsel advise them before purchase. The title they relied upon was free of encumbrances except for the 1/3 share held by the Palomos, whose acquisition and assignment had judicial approval. No evidence of fraud, bad faith, or negligence was found against spouses Tan.

The burden to prove bad faith rested upon



...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.